Home >> Legisprudence, Volume 4, Number 3

Smoking Bans in the Netherlands: A Mix of Self-Regulation and Regulation by Government

Author: Weyers, Heleen

Source: Legisprudence, Volume 4, Number 3, December 2010 , pp. 327-342(16)

Publisher: Hart Publishing

Buy & download fulltext article:

OR

Price: $51.88 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

Self-regulation is supposed to have many advantages. It is seen as cheaper, more effective and more flexible than regulation by government. In this article I examine these assumptions by looking at the self-regulation with respect to smoke-free workplaces with special attention for smoking bans in the Dutch hospitality industry. It turns out that governments deemed these forms of self-regulation as insufficient. Subsequent regulation by the government, however, proved to be rather effective. This contra-intuitive finding is explained by pointing at the preparatory effect of the self-regulation and the importance of the timing of regulation.

Keywords: SMOKING BANS; EFFECTIVENESS; HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY; BOTTOM UP VS TOP-DOWN

Document Type: Research article

Publication date: 2010-12-01

More about this publication?
  • Legisprudence aims at contributing to the improvement of legislation by studying the processes of legislation from the perspective of legal theory. The content of the journal covers legislation in a broad sense. This comprises legislation in both the formal and the material sense (from national and European parliaments, regulation, international law), and alternatives to legislation (covenants, sunset legislation, etc.). It also takes in regulation (pseudo-legislation, codes of behaviour and deontological codes, etc.). The journal is theoretical and reflective. Contributions to the journal make use of an interdisciplinary method in legal theory. Comparative and system transcending approaches are encouraged. Sociological, historical, or economic studies are taken into account to the extent that they are relevant from the perspective of interdisciplinary legal theory. Dogmatic descriptions of positive law are not taken into consideration.
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Subscribe to this Title
  • Information for Advertisers
  • Contents
  • Sample Paper
  • Email alerts (Hart books and journals)
  • ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites
Related content
Marked list

Tools

Key

Free Content
Free content
New Content
New content
Open Access Content
Open access content
Subscribed Content
Subscribed content
Free Trial Content
Free trial content

Text size:

A | A | A | A
^ Back to top
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. print icon Print this page